Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Nov 26:2:60.
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00060. eCollection 2014.

Developments in the tools and methodologies of synthetic biology

Affiliations
Review

Developments in the tools and methodologies of synthetic biology

Richard Kelwick et al. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. .

Abstract

Synthetic biology is principally concerned with the rational design and engineering of biologically based parts, devices, or systems. However, biological systems are generally complex and unpredictable, and are therefore, intrinsically difficult to engineer. In order to address these fundamental challenges, synthetic biology is aiming to unify a "body of knowledge" from several foundational scientific fields, within the context of a set of engineering principles. This shift in perspective is enabling synthetic biologists to address complexity, such that robust biological systems can be designed, assembled, and tested as part of a biological design cycle. The design cycle takes a forward-design approach in which a biological system is specified, modeled, analyzed, assembled, and its functionality tested. At each stage of the design cycle, an expanding repertoire of tools is being developed. In this review, we highlight several of these tools in terms of their applications and benefits to the synthetic biology community.

Keywords: design cycle; engineering biology; standardization; synthetic biology; tools.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Synthetic Biology Index of Tools and Software (SynBITS). A schematic summary of the synthetic biology design cycle tools as depicted in SynBITS (www.synbits.co.uk), an online community-managed index of synthetic biology tools and software.
Figure 2
Figure 2
DNA assembly strategies. Restriction enzyme – restriction enzymes recognize specific DNA sequences and either cut within their recognition sequence (Type II) or adjacent to its recognition sequence (Type IIS) to create sticky or blunt-ended DNA fragments that can be ligated to other DNA fragments. Recombination – cellular DNA repair and recombination machinery can be utilized to integrate a DNA construct within a specific genomic locus. Integration is guided through 5′ and 3′ sequence complementarity of the integration sequence with the target locus. Overlap-directed – assembly order is guided by 20–40 bp overlaps at the ends of each DNA fragment that share sequence homology with adjacent DNA fragments. In the case of Gibson assembly, these homologous ends are processed (chew-back) and fused together (anneal) via the sequential activity of an exonuclease, a ligase, and a polymerase. DNA synthesis – DNA sequences are designed and optimized in silico for de novo synthesis. Commercial constructs are delivered as gene fragments or are pre-cloned within a plasmid vector.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Systematic design of biological systems. The biological design cycle is one of several engineering principles that have been adopted in synthetic biology, and it describes the iterative process of designing a biological system through multiple rounds of design, build, and testing. To ensure that iterations of the design cycle are informative, the systematic capture, and integration of experimental and experiential data within a biological design workflow, such as the one shown here, is desirable.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Acevedo-Rocha C. G., Fang G., Schmidt M., Ussery D. W., Danchin A. (2013). From essential to persistent genes: a functional approach to constructing synthetic life. Trends Genet. 29, 273–279.10.1016/j.tig.2012.11.001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Agapakis C. M. (2013). Designing synthetic biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 3, 121–12810.1021/sb4001068 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Agapakis C. M., Boyle P. M., Silver P. A. (2012). Natural strategies for the spatial optimization of metabolism in synthetic biology. Nat. Chem. Biol. 8, 527–535.10.1038/nchembio.975 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderson J., Strelkowa N., Stan G. B., Douglas T., Savulescu J., Barahona M., et al. (2012). Engineering and ethical perspectives in synthetic biology. Rigorous, robust and predictable designs, public engagement and a modern ethical framework are vital to the continued success of synthetic biology. EMBO Rep. 13, 584–59010.1038/embor.2012.81 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson J. C., Dueber J. E., Leguia M., Wu G. C., Goler J. A., Arkin A. P., et al. (2010). BglBricks: a flexible standard for biological part assembly. J. Biol. Eng. 4, 1.10.1186/1754-1611-4-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed